Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Biogas for Clean Energy

By Demsew Mitiku Teferra and Wondwosen Wubu

Submitted: May 21st 2018Reviewed: June 14th 2018Published: November 5th 2018

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.79534

Downloaded: 547

Abstract

This chapter demonstrates a biogas renewable energy resource potential study for electric power generation from easily available biogas feedstock materials in four selected case study sites. Under this study, the site used in the model is a rural Kebele in Jama Woreda at 10.548° N, 39.33° E. The common biogas feedstocks considered under this study are animal slurry, human feces and jatropha byproducts whereas the biodiesel is considered from jatropha seed.

Keywords

  • anaerobic digestion
  • bioenergy
  • biogas digester
  • feedstock
  • Jatropha

1. Introduction

Biogas is a byproduct of biomass which contains methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) as a main gas component in a 3:2 ratio and it is produced through micro bacterial digestion processes under anaerobic conditions from a variety of organic material from animal, agricultural, industrial and domestic wastes [1]. The biogas production level is depending on the ingredient level in the feedstock. For example; if the material consists of mainly carbohydrates, like glucose and other simple sugars and high-molecular polymers such as cellulose and hemicelluloses, the methane production is low. However, if the fat content is high, the methane production is likewise high (Table 1) [2].

Table 1.

Biogas composition.

Methane and other additional hydrogen compounds make up the combustible part of biogas. Methane is a colorless and odorless gas with a boiling point of −162°C and it burns with a blue flame. At normal temperature and pressure, methane has a density of approximately 0.75 kg/m3. Due to carbon dioxide being somewhat heavier, biogas has a slightly higher density of 1.15–1.25 kg/m3. Pure methane has an upper calorific value of 39.8 MJ/m3 (11.06 kWh/m3) (Table 2) [2].

SubstrateHRT (days)Solid concentration (%)Temperature (°C)Biogas yield (m3/kg VS)Methane (%)
Sewage sludge256350.5268
Domestic garbage305350.47
Piggery waste206.5350.4369
Poultry waste156350.569
Cattle waste3010350.358
Canteen waste2010300.650
Food-market waste204350.7562
Mango processing waste2010350.4552
Tomato-processing waste244.5350.6365
Lemon waste304370.7253
Citrus waste324370.6362
Banana peel2510370.6055
Pineapple waste304370.3760
Mixed feed of fruit waste204370.6250

Table 2.

Potential biogas production from various biomass feedstocks on VS based.

2. The biogas production process

Anaerobic digestion (AD) is a biochemical process during which complex organic matter is decomposed in absence of oxygen, by various types of anaerobic microorganisms. The result of the AD process is the biogas and the digestate. Biogas is a combustible gas, consisting primarily of methane and carbon dioxide. Digestate is the decomposed substrate, resulted from the production of biogas. If the substrate for AD is a homogenous mixture of two or more feedstock types (e.g., animal slurries and organic wastes from food industries), the process is called “co-digestion” and is common to most biogas applications today.

The process of biogas formation is a result of linked process steps, in which the initial material is continuously broken down into smaller units. Specific groups of micro-organisms are involved in each individual step. The simplified diagram of the AD process, shown in Figure 1, highlights the four main process steps: hydrolysis, acidogenesis, acetogenesis, and methanogenesis. The process steps quoted in Figure 1 run parallel in time and space, in the digester tank. During hydrolysis, relatively small amounts of biogas are produced. Biogas production reaches its peak during methanogenesis [3].

Figure 1.

Biogas production process by anaerobic digestion.

Methanogenesis is a critical step in the entire anaerobic digestion process, as it is the slowest biochemical reaction of the process. Methanogenesis is severely influenced by operation conditions. Composition of feedstock, feeding rate, temperature, water content, NH3 concentration and pH are examples of factors influencing the methanogenesis process.

Temperature for fermentation will greatly affect biogas production. The AD process can take place at different temperatures, divided into three temperature ranges: psychrophilic (below 20°C), mesophilic (30–42°C), and thermophilic (43–55°C). There is a direct relation between the process temperature and the HRT. The biogas production rate increases with increase the process temperature (Table 3).

Thermal stageProcess TemperatureMinimum HRT
Psychrophilic< 20° C70–80 days
Mesophilic30–42° C30–40 days
Thermophilic43–55° C15–20 days

Table 3.

Biogas production thermal stage and their corresponding retention time [4].

In practice most modern biogas plants operate at thermophilic process temperatures because this process provides many advantages, compared to mesophilic and psychrophilic processes:

  • Effective destruction of pathogens

  • Fast grow rate of methanogenic bacteria at higher temperature

  • Minimization of biogas production period, making the process faster and more efficient

  • Improve digestibility and availability of substrates

  • better decomposition and utilization of solid substrates

  • Increase the chance to separate liquid and solid fractions

The metabolic processes in the production of biogas from different biomass feedstocks are hydrolysis, acidogenesis, acetogenesis and methanogenesis and their byproducts in the process is represented in the figure below.

In this study thermophilic biogas temperature process is chosen in order to get higher biogas output and to achieve this target flat plate collector can be used to maintain digester process temperature at 55oc.

3. Biogas plant

A biogas plant is a complex installation, consisting of a variety of elements. The layout of such a plant depends to a large extent on the types and amounts of feedstock supplied. Now there are several main types of biogas plants all over the world. Each time it is necessary to find the most suitable type in different case. Public acceptance, cost and energy efficiency are the main criteria to install biogas plant and efficiently utilize the biogas production. In smaller areas with scarcity of biogas feedstock or slurry to use low cost clay, concert or stone masonry made biogas digester.

Installation and operation of a biogas plant is a combination of environmental, safety, economic and technical considerations. Acquiring maximum methane output, by complete digestion of feedstock substrate, would require a long fermentation or digestion time of the material inside the biogas digester and a correspondingly large digester size. The ultimate goal of biogas production is getting the highest possible methane output and having justifiable plant economy. Biogas plants have the following main components and operate with four different process stages [3].

Process stages of biogas production:

  • Transport, delivery, storage and pre-treatment of feedstocks

  • Biogas production

  • Storage of digestate, conditioning and utilization

  • Storage of biogas, conditioning and utilization.

Main components of biogas plant:

  • Feedstock pre-storage tank

  • Substrate mixing Tank

  • Biogas digester

  • Post storage tank

  • Gas holder tank and

  • CHP system

The amount and type of available feedstock can determine the size, type and design structure of the biogas plant. The amount of biogas feedstock could determine the dimensioning of the digester size, storage capacities and CHP unit (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Main components and general process flow of biogas production.

The CHP system utilizes the biogas either in heat or electrical energy. The properties of the combustible methane gas (like as shown in Table 4) will affect the operation of the CHP equipment. The combustion nature of the gas must be guaranteed, to prevent damage to the engines. Further treatment and enhancing chemical and physical properties of biogas even possible to use it for other utilizations like as vehicle fuel or in fuel cells application.

No.ParameterSymbolValue
1.Lower heat valueLHV≥4 kWh/m3
2.Sulfur contentS≤2.2 g/m3 CH4
3.Hydrogen sulfideH2S≤0.15 Vol. %
4.Chlorine contentCl≤100 mg/m3 CH4
5.Fluoride contentF≤50 mg/m3 CH4
6.Dust (3–10 μm)≤10 mg/m3 CH4
7.Relative humidityϕ<90%
8.Flow pressurePgas20–100 mbar
9.Gas pressure fluctuation<±10% of set value
10.Gas temperatureT10–50oc
11.Hydro carbonHC<0.4 mg/m3 CH4
12.SiliconSi<10 mg/CH4

Table 4.

Biogas minimum requirement used in an electric engine [3].

4. Design of the biogas plant

The design of the biogas plant includes the design of:

  • The digester

  • The gas Holder

  • Digester heat maintaining system

  • Siting of biogas plant

To calculate the scale of a biogas plant, certain characteristic parameters are used. These are:

  • Daily fermentation slurry feeding (Sd), which is an equal mixture of biogas feedstock (animal dung, human feces, poultry waste and jatropha byproduct) with water feed in to the biogas digester.

  • Retention time (RT), the time by which the fermentation slurry stays in the digester. It is about 2–5 weeks.

  • Digester loading (R). This parameter indicates the amount of biogas feedstock material per day is fed to the digester or to be digested. It can be measured in kg/m3/day.

  • Specific gas production per day (Gd), which depends on the retention time, the digestion temperature and the feed material.

4.1. Sizing of biogas digester and gasholder

The size of the digester—the digester volume (VD)—is determined by the length of the retention time (RT) and by the amount of fermentation slurry supplied daily (SD). The amount of fermentation slurry consists of the feed material considered in this study (e.g., cattle dung) and the mixing water.

4.1.1. Sizing of site-A biogas digester and gasholder

Daily average collectable biogas feedstock potential from cow dung, oxen dung, donkey, mule, and horse waste, chicken waste, human feces and jatropha byproduct in this study in tons/day is 10.867 = 10,867 kg/day = 15.53 m3/day. Since the average density of animal slurry mix is 700 kg/m3.

Additional 15.53 m3/day water is required for proper digestion of biogas feedstock material to enhance biogas production.

HRT = 20 day, under thermophilic digestion temperature (55°C) the hydraulic retention time of the digestion process becomes short.

The volume of digester should be, VD = HRT × SD.

= 20 day × (15.53 × 2 m3/day) = 621 m3.

Therefore the size of the digester for site A could be 621 m3.

Where, VD = the size of the digester, HRT = hydraulic retention time, and SD is the amount of fermentation slurry (water + feedstock) feed in to the digester per day. Biogas yield in m3/kg of fresh biogas feedstock mix is 1736.4 m3/31850 kg = 0.054 m3/kg; the biogas production rate is 10,867 kg/day × 0.054 m3/kg = 588 m3/day. Therefore the size of gasholder should account this daily biogas production.

4.1.2. Sizing of site-B biogas digester and gasholder

Daily average collectable biogas feedstock potential from cow dung, oxen dung, donkey, mule, and horse waste, chicken waste, human feces and jatropha byproduct of Site-B in tons/day is 9.253 = 9253 kg/day = 13.22 m3/day. Since the average density of animal slurry mix is 700 kg/m3.

Additional 13.22 m3/day water is required for proper digestion process of biogas feedstock material to enhance biogas production.

HRT = 20 day, under thermophilic digestion temperature the hydraulic retention time of the digestion process becomes short.

The volume of digester should be, VD = HRT × SD.

= 20 day × (13.22 × 2 m3/day) = 529 m3. Therefore the size of the digester for site-B is 529 m3. The biogas gas production rate is 9253 kg/day × 0.054 m3/kg = 501 m3/day. Therefore the size of gasholder should account this daily biogas production.

4.1.3. Sizing of site-C biogas digester and gasholder

Daily average collectable biogas feedstock potential from cattle dung, donkey, mule, and horse waste, chicken waste, human feces and jatropha byproduct of site-C in tons/day is 8.82 = 8820 kg/day = 12.6 m3/day, Since the average density of animal slurry mix is 700 kg/m3.

Additional 12.6 m3/day water is required for proper digestion of biogas feedstock material to enhance biogas production.

The volume of digester should be, VD = HRT × SD, HRT = 20 day.

= 20 day × (12.6 × 2 m3/day) = 504 m3.

Therefore the size of the digester for site-C is 504 m3.

The gas production rate is 8820 kg/day × 0.054 m3/kg = 477 m3/day. Therefore the size of gasholder should account this daily biogas production also.

4.1.4. Sizing of site-D biogas digester and gasholder

Daily average collectable biogas feedstock potential of Site-D in tons/day is 3.091 = 3091 kg/day = 4.42 m3/day, since the average density of animal slurry mix is taken as 700 kg/m3. Additional 4.42 m3/day water is required.

The volume of digester should be, VD = HRT × SD, HRT = 20 day.

= 20 day × (4.42 × 2 m3/day) = 179 m3.

Therefore the size of the digester for site-D is 179 m3.

The gas production rate is 3091 kg/day × 0.054 m3/kg = 168 m3/day. Therefore the size of gasholder should account this daily biogas production.

4.2. Location of biogas plant

The next planning step in a biogas plant project idea is to find a suitable site for the establishment of the plant. The list below shows some important considerations to be made, before choosing the location of the plant: [3].

  • The site should be located at suitable distance from residential areas in order to avoid inconveniences, nuisance and thereby conflicts related to odors and increased traffic to and from the biogas plant.

  • The direction of the dominating winds must be considered in order to avoid wind born odors reaching residential areas.

  • The site should have easy access to infrastructure such as to the electricity grid, in order to facilitate the sale of electricity and to the transport roads in order to facilitate transport of feedstock and digestate.

  • The soil of the site should be investigated before starting the construction.

  • The chosen site should not be located in a potential flood affected area.

  • The size of the site must be suitable for the activities performed and for the amount of biomass supplied.

  • The site should be located relatively close (central) to the agricultural feedstock production (manure, slurry, energy crops) aiming to minimize distances, time and costs of feedstock transportation.

  • For cost efficiency reasons, the biogas plant should be located as close as possible to potential users of the produced heat and electricity.

The required site space for a biogas plant cannot be estimated in a simple way. Experience shows that for example a biogas plant of 500 kWel needs an area of approximate 8000 m2. This figure can be used as a guiding value only, as the actual area also depends on the chosen technology [3]. Based on the above criteria of site selection of biogas plant, the location of the biogas plant for each site of the study area is chosen and the detail of it is found in the economic analysis section of the biogas plant in this paper.

5. Biogas potential

5.1. Biogas potential from jatropha

Various literatures show that methane yield of jatropha fruit hull is 0.438 m3/kg VS, and the VS is 76% of the TS of the jatropha fruit hull. Methane is 50% of the total biogas yield (1.153 m3/kg). The biogas yield of Jatropha seed presscake is approximately 1 m3/kg of presscake. The biogas yield of jatropha fruit hull is better than the seedcake [5]. Based on the jatropha fact sheet given in Table 5, the biomass, biogas and methane yield potential of the jatropha byproduct is estimated in Tables 6, 7 and 8.

ParameterUnitMinimumAverageMaximumSource
Seed yielddry ton/hectare/year0.33.156Position Paper on Jatropha Large Scale Project Development, FACT 2007
Fruit hull yielddry ton/hectare/year0.22.14
Rainfall requirements for seed productionmm/year60010001500Position Paper on Jatropha Large Scale Project Development, FACT 2007
Oil content of seeds% of mass_34%40%Jatropha bio-diesel production and use, W. Achten et al., 2008
Oil yield after pressing% of mass of seed input20%25%30%Jatropha handbook, 2010
Presscake yield after pressing% of mass of seed input707580
Energy content of SeedMJ/kg37

Table 5.

Jatropha fact sheet.

Biogas feedstockJatropha biomass, tons/yearAverage jatropha biomass, tons/yearBiogas yield, m3/kgMethane yield, m3/kgTotal biogas yield, m3Average biogas yield, m3/yearAverage methane yield, m3/year
Presscake4.2–9650.110.5–0.64200–96,00050,10025,050-30,060
Fruit hull4–80421.1530.576–0.694612–92,24048,42627,894–33,414
Total8.2–17692.11.070.575–0.6898812–188,24098,52652,944–63,474

Table 6.

Jatropha byproduct biomass potential in the study area.

Jatropha biomass (from presscake) = seed yield (ton/hectare) × % of presscake yield during oil production * total land for Jatropha farming (hectare)

Jatropha biomass (from fruit hull) = hull yield (ton/hectare) × total land for Jatropha farming (hectare).

ProfileJatropha biomass, tonsBiogas yield, m3/kgBiogas yield, m3Methane yield, m3/kgMethane yield, m3
Yearly average92.11.0798,5260.575–0.68952,944–63,474
Daily average0.2531.072700.575–0.689145–174

Table 7.

Jatropha biogas potential of the study area.

Jatropha productJatropha oil (liter/year)Jatropha biogas (m3/year)Jatropha fertilizer (kg/year)Jatropha biomass (ton/year)
Product yield16,090–18,77498,52618,42092.1

Table 8.

Summary of Jatropha potential of the study area.

5.2. Biogas energy potential of the study area from animal dung

A wide range of biomass types can be used as substrates (feedstock) for the production of biogas from AD. The most common biomass categories used in biogas production are listed in Table 9 for this thesis work. To produce biogas from animal manure first we have to check whether we have animal livestock potential sufficient for biogas feedstock production or not. The following Table demonstrates the animal livestock potential for each sites of the study area.

Animal livestockSite-ASite-BSite-CSite-DAve. no. of animal/HHTotal livestock in the study area
Cows6665665351721.71935
Oxen7196125771841.852092
Goats163139131430.42476
Sheep1841156714774724.725350
Mule1210930.0329
Chickens23401992187860066810
Pigs000000
Horse484037120.12133
Donkey345295278890.891007

Table 9.

Jama Woreda, Kebele-8 districts animal livestock potential.

Source: Jama Woreda rural development and Kebele-8 administration office, Nov 2012.

The average fresh manure obtained from, cattle is 4.5 kg/day/head [1, 6, 7], donkey, horse and mule is 10 kg/day/head [6, 7], sheep and goat 1 kg/day/head [6, 7], and chicken is 0.08 kg/day/head [6, 7]. The average biogas yield of cattle, horse, mule, and donkey manure is 0.24 m3/kg DM [2, 3, 8] and pigs, sheep and goat is 0.37 m3/kg DM whereas chicken is 0.4 m3/kg of DM [2, 3, 8]. The dry matter content from the total mass of fresh animal manure and the proportion of methane from the total biogas production is summarized in Table 10 [2, 3, 9] (Table 11).

Biomass sourceAverage fresh manure, kg/day/headm3 biogas/kg DMDM % fresh manureMethane % biogas
Cattle4.50.2416.765
Pigs20.374.465
Sheep, goats10.3730.765
Chickens0.080.4030.765
Horse, mule100.24765
Donkey100.241565

Table 10.

Summary of fresh manure, biogas and methane yield of animal livestock.

Total fresh manure potential of the study area (tons/day) = Average fresh manure (kg/day/head) × Total no. of livestock in study area.

Total dry mater (DM) from fresh manure = DM % of fresh manure × Total fresh manure potential of the study area (tons/day).

Total biogas production, m3/day = Biogas m3/kg of DM × Total dry mater (DM) from fresh manure in kg/day.

Total electricity production in kWh/day = electricity production by biogas generator from 1 m3 biogas in kWh × total biogas production in m3/day.

By using biogas generator it is possible to generate 1kWh electricity from 0.7 m3 biogas [42].

Animal livestockAve. fresh manure, kg/day/headTotal no. of livestock in study areaTotal fresh manure (ton/day)Total DM (kg/day)Biogas, m3/kg of DMTotal biogas, m3/dayElectricity production, kWh/day
Cows4.519358.70814550.24350500
Oxen4.520929.41415730.24378540
Goats14760.4761470.375579
Sheep153505.35016430.37608869
Mule10290.290240.2469
Chicken0.0868100.5451680.406898
Pigs200.0000.000.370.00.0
Horse101331.330920.242232
Donkey10100710.07015110.24363519
Total animal manure biomass36.18366130.2818502646

Table 11.

Summary of expected animal manure potential of the study area.

For a given size of plant (rated gas production capacity per day) the amount of feedstock required can be estimated using the biogas yield data provided. The specific biogas consumption in biogas engines is 0.6–0.8 m3/kWh [1]. This specific fuel consumption value can be used to calculate the requirement for biogas for power generation purposes. The expected biomass potential from animal manure of the case study area is 36.2 tons/day and its biogas production capacity is 1850 m3/day. Various literatures show that the collection efficiency of animal manure varies from country to country and region to region.

Most significantly the collection efficiency varies from 50 to 100% [10]. Let as consider collection efficiency of 90% for cattle, donkey, mule, horse, pig and chicken manure, 50% for goat and sheep manure and 100% for human feces based on their difficulty of collecting it. Therefore the biomass potential available for biogas generation is estimated as follows.

The total collectable fresh animal manure biomass potential of the study area is estimated to be 30.235 tons/day and its biogas production capacity is 1398.3 m3/day (Table 12).

Animal livestockAve. fresh manure, kg/day/headTotal no. of livestock in study areaTotal collectable fresh manure, tons/dayTotal collectable DM, kg/dayBiogas, m3/kg of DMTotal biogas, m3/dayElectricity production, kWh/day
Cows4.519357.8371309.50.24315450
Oxen4.520928.4731415.70.24340486
Goats14760.23873.50.3727.339
Sheep153502.675821.50.37304434.3
Mule10290.26121.60.245.27.43
Chicken0.0868100.491151.20.4060.586.43
Pigs200.0000.000.370.00.0
Horse101331.19782.80.2419.928.43
Donkey1010079.06313600.24326.4466.3
Total animal manure Biomass30.2355235.80.271398.31998

Table 12.

Summary of collectable animal manure potential of the study area.

5.3. Biogas potential of the study area from human feces

Human feces are another feedstock for biogas production in the study area and the potential biogas production from human feces is discussed in this section. Feces are mostly made of water (about 75%). The rest is made of dead bacteria that helped us digest our food, living bacteria, protein, undigested food residue (known as fiber), waste material from food, cellular linings, fats, salts, and substances released from the intestines (such as mucus) and the liver (Table 13).

PopulationSite-ASite-BSite-CSite-DTotal
Number of household3903323131001135
Average Family per household4.39 (5)4.39 (5)4.39 (5)4.39 (5)4.39 (5)
Total population1950166015655005675

Table 13.

Jama Woreda, Kebele-8 districts population data.

One person produces on average 100–140 g of feces per day, the dry matter content of which is about 25% and its biogas yield of about 0.2 m3/kg DM [11]. The total collectable fresh manure biomass potential of the case study area from humans is estimated to be 0.681 tons/day and its biogas production capacity is 34.05 m3/day. This figure accounts the collection efficiency of human excreta. Table 14 demonstrates the biogas potential of the study area from human feces.

Live stockAve. fresh manure, kg/day/headTotal no. of populationTotal fresh manure potential (ton/day)Total DM (kg/day)Biogas, m3/kg DMTotal biogas, m3/dayElectricity production, kWh/day
Human0.1256750.681170.250.234.0548.7

Table 14.

Biogas potential of study area from human feces.

5.4. Total biogas potential of the study area

The total biogas potential from Jatropha byproduct, Animal waste and human feces discussed above can be summarized in this section.

Taking the density of biogas 1.15 kg/m3 and calculating the gasification ratio (the mass of biogas produced per unit mass of feed stock consumed) of the biogas system. From Table 15 the mass of biogas feedstock consumed is 31,850 kg/day and the gas produced is 1736.4 m3/day. Therefore the gasification ratio of biogas feedstock mix is 1736.4 m3/31850 kg = 0.0545 m3/kg = 0.0626 kg/kg.

As we have seen from Table 15, animal manure is the major biogas feedstock constitutes which accounts 97% from the total biogas feedstock potential whereas jatropha byproducts and human excreta constitute 1 and 2% of the total biogas feedstock potential of the study area respectively. However, the share of biogas production from, animal manure is 82%, and human excreta is 2% but biogas production from jatropha byproduct is increase to 16% regardless of its low contribution to the biomass potential since the biogas yield of jatropha byproduct is high as compared to both animal and human manure and this can be summarized in Figure 3 given below.

Animal LivestockAve. fresh manure, kg/day/headTotal no. of live stockTotal collectable fresh manure (ton/day)Total collectable DM (kg/day)Biogas, m3/kg DMTotal biogas production, m3/dayElectricity yield, kWh/day
Cows4.519357.8371309.50.24315450
Oxen4.520928.4731415.70.24340486
Goats14760.23873.50.3727.339
Sheep153502.675821.50.37304434.3
Mule10290.26121.60.245.27.43
Chicken0.0868100.491151.20.4060.586.43
Pigs200.0000.000.370.00.0
Horse101331.19782.80.2419.928.43
Donkey1010079.06313600.24326.4466.3
Human0.1256750.681170.250.234.0548.7
Jatropha byproduct biomass0.2532531.07270386
Total31.855829.30.31736.42481.4

Table 15.

The total biogas and collectable feedstock potential of the study area.

Figure 3.

Biogas feedstock contributions for biogas production in the study area.

5.5. Monthly variation of the biogas feed stock potential

The variation of jatropha byproduct feedstocks is assumed to be constant throughout the year and the potential biomass obtained from it was divided to each site regardless of the total house hold in each of the study area.

However, the biomass obtained from animal is highly depending on the availability and type of the animal feeding material. The animal feeding materials are varying in type and amount from month to month in the study area. In June and July there is enough root grass in addition to the usual animal food, let as consider this value as the annual average in ton/day (the data obtained by multiplying the biomass obtained per animal live stock in ton/day with the total number of animal live stock for each animal group in the district), as a reference frame. In January, February, and December there is excess dry agricultural farm grass for the animal food in the study area and assuming a 5% biomass resource increment is expected from the reference. March and April is a dry season and there is no enough food for the animal so considering a 5% biomass resource decrement from the reference. May, extremely drought month and August, animal grazing area are not permitted for animal food assuming a 10% animal based biomass resource drop is expected. From September to November there is excess animal food and a 10% biomass growth is assumed. Also assuming chicken manure and human feces are constant throughout the year. Taking in to account the assumption listed above the biogas feedstock potential month to month variation is presented in Tables 1619.

MonthBiomass, tons/day
CowOxenMuleHorseDonkeySheepGoatsChickenJatrophHumanTotal
Jan2.823.0690.1140.45363.280.9670.0860.170.06330.23411.257
Feb2.823.0690.1140.45363.280.9670.0860.170.06330.23411.257
Mar2.5522.7750.10310.41042.970.8750.080.170.06330.23410.233
Apr2.5522.7750.10310.41042.970.8750.080.170.06330.23410.233
May2.4172.630.09720.36542.8110.830.0740.170.06330.2349.693
Jun2.6862.9210.1080.4323.1230.9210.0820.170.06330.23410.740
Jul2.6862.9210.1080.4323.1230.9210.0820.170.06330.23410.740
Aug2.4172.630.09720.36542.8110.830.0740.170.06330.2349.6912
Sep2.9543.2130.1190.4753.43531.0130.090.170.06330.23411.767
Oct2.9543.2130.1190.4753.43531.0130.090.170.06330.23411.767
Nov2.9543.2130.1190.4753.43531.0130.090.170.06330.23411.767
Dec2.823.0690.1140.45363.280.9670.0860.170.06330.23411.257
Average2.6932.9580.10960.43353.16280.93270.0830.170.06330.23410.867

Table 16.

Biomass resource of site-A—390 families.

MonthBiomass, tons/day
CowOxenMuleHorseDonkeySheepGoatsChickenJatrophaHumanTotal
Jan2.402.6140.0950.3782.7880.8230.0730.1440.06330.1839.56
Feb2.402.6140.0950.3782.7880.8230.0730.1440.06330.1839.56
Mar2.172.3640.0860.3422.5230.7440.0660.1440.06330.1838.69
Apr2.172.3640.0860.3422.5230.7440.0660.1440.06330.1838.69
May2.0562.2400.0810.3242.3900.7060.0620.1440.06330.1838.25
Jun2.2842.4890.090.362.6550.7840.0700.1440.06330.1839.12
Jul2.2842.4890.090.362.6550.7840.0700.1440.06330.1839.12
Aug2.0562.2400.0810.3242.380.7060.0620.1440.06330.1838.24
Sep2.5132.7370.0990.4692.9210.8620.0770.1440.06330.18310.07
Oct2.5132.7370.0990.4692.9210.8620.0770.1440.06330.18310.07
Nov2.5132.7370.0990.4692.9210.8620.0770.1440.06330.18310.07
Dec2.402.6140.0950.3782.7880.8230.0730.1440.06330.1839.56
Average2.3132.520.090.3832.690.7940.0710.1440.06330.1839.25

Table 17.

Biomass resource of site-B—332 families.

MonthBiomass, tons/day
CowOxenMuleHorseDonkeySheepGoatsChickenJatrophaHumanTotal
Jan2.2632.460.0850.7552.6370.7760.0690.1360.06330.1889.434
Feb2.2632.460.0850.7552.6370.7760.0690.1360.06330.1889.431
Mar2.0482.230.0770.3162.3850.7020.0620.1360.06330.1888.206
Apr2.0482.230.0770.3162.3850.7020.0620.1360.06330.1888.206
May1.942.130.0730.302.260.6650.0590.1360.06330.1887.812
Jun2.1562.350.0810.3332.5110.7390.0660.1360.06330.1888.618
Jul2.1562.350.0810.3332.5110.7390.0660.1360.06330.1888.618
Aug1.942.1230.0730.302.260.6650.0590.1360.06330.1887.812
Sep2.372.5560.0890.412.760.8130.0720.1360.06330.1889.457
Oct2.372.5560.0890.412.760.8130.0720.1360.06330.1889.457
Nov2.372.5560.0890.4182.760.8130.0720.1360.06330.1889.457
Dec2.2632.4630.0850.7552.6370.6690.0690.1360.06330.1889.328
Average2.1832.3720.0820.4492.5420.7390.0670.1360.06330.1888.820

Table 18.

Biomass resource of site-C—313 families.

MonthBiomass, tons/day
CowOxenMuleHorseDonkeySheepGoatsChickenJatrophaHumanTotal
Jan0.7230.7870.0290.11340.8410.4960.0440.04320.06330.063.199
Feb0.7230.7870.0290.11340.8410.4960.0440.04320.06330.063.199
Mar0.6540.7120.0260.10260.7610.4480.040.04320.06330.062.910
Apr0.6540.7120.0260.10260.7610.4480.040.04320.06330.062.910
May0.6200.6740.0240.09720.7210.4250.0380.04320.06330.062.766
Jun0.6890.7500.0270.1080.8010.4720.0430.04320.06330.063.056
Jul0.6890.7500.0270.1080.8010.4720.0430.04320.06330.063.056
Aug0.6200.6750.0240.09720.7210.4250.0380.04320.06330.062.766
Sep0.7570.8250.030.11880.8810.5190.0460.04320.06330.063.344
Oct0.7570.8250.030.11880.8810.5190.0460.04320.06330.063.344
Nov0.7570.8250.030.11880.8810.5190.0460.04320.06330.063.344
Dec0.7230.7870.0280.11340.8410.4960.0440.04320.06330.063.199
Average0.6970.7590.0270.10940.8110.4780.0430.04320.06330.063.091

Table 19.

Biomass resource of site-D—100 families.

6. Conclusion

The renewable energy potential of the site is estimated based on the primary data collected directly from the study area and secondary data obtained from various sources. The biogas feedstock mix potential of the study area is found to be 10.9 tons/day, 9.25 tons/day, 8.81 tons/day and 3.09 tons/day for Site-A, Site-B, Site-C and Site-D respectively with a gasification ratio of 0.0626 kg/kg. The study result shows that there is a sufficient biogas feedstock potential for all districts of the study area and the feasibility simulation result demonstrates there is an excess biogas after running a biogas generator in a hybrid system. The excess biogas left unused from a hybrid electric generating unit would go to biogas cooking application for the community cooking loads. Also, the biodiesel potential of the study area from Jatropha is estimated to be 18.5 m3/year.

How to cite and reference

Link to this chapter Copy to clipboard

Cite this chapter Copy to clipboard

Demsew Mitiku Teferra and Wondwosen Wubu (November 5th 2018). Biogas for Clean Energy, Anaerobic Digestion, J. Rajesh Banu, IntechOpen, DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.79534. Available from:

chapter statistics

547total chapter downloads

More statistics for editors and authors

Login to your personal dashboard for more detailed statistics on your publications.

Access personal reporting

Related Content

This Book

Next chapter

Non-Catalytic Reforming of Biogas in Porous Media Combustion

By Mario Toledo Torres

Related Book

First chapter

Abiotic Stress Diagnosis via Laser Induced Chlorophyll Fluorescence Analysis in Plants for Biofuel

By Artur S. Gouveia-Neto, Elias Arcanjo da Silva-Jr, Patrícia C. Cunha, Ronaldo A. Oliveira-Filho, Luciana M. H. Silva, Ernande B. da Costa, Terezinha J. R. Câmara and Lilia G. Willadino

We are IntechOpen, the world's leading publisher of Open Access books. Built by scientists, for scientists. Our readership spans scientists, professors, researchers, librarians, and students, as well as business professionals. We share our knowledge and peer-reveiwed research papers with libraries, scientific and engineering societies, and also work with corporate R&D departments and government entities.

More About Us